Why Would I Ever Want to Pay Sales Taxes On The Internet?
I note in the papers that the powers-what-be want to tax sales on the Internet. I am bemused. Bearing in mind that a tax is ideally a way for governments to bill their constituents for services rendered, I find it interesting that there are certain local governments who wish to bill even those for whom they render no service whatsoever.
Mind you, that is an idealized tax. The reality is often far grimmer. Taxes in this day and age are usually levied to pay for pork barrel politics, or to replace funds squandered through mismanagement or spent on projects that never should have been funded, publicly or otherwise. A perfect example of this can be seen here in Califrisky, where our wonderful Governor took a 12 billion dollar state budget surplus and drove it into a 50 billion dollar deficit in about two years. Thus, we in the state are required to pay a trebled car-licensing fee in a feeble attempt to make up some of this yawning deficit, among other vexations to the spirit. My wife has gently suggested that only those who voted for Mr. Davis should have to pay the increased fees, or the added gasoline taxes, or the increased sales taxes, or…well, you get the idea. Gasoline fees originally meant to pay for road maintenance are siphoned off to pay for somebody's boondoggle, so we must pay an extra cent per dollar to make sure our highways remain in order. And so it goes.
Well, I drive on those roads, and I enjoy police and fire services, and while I've never ridden in an ambulance, if the average level of driving continues to drop as it has, I almost certainly will at some point in the future. My son attends public schools (very nice ones, thank you very much; not all public schools are inferior to those moron mills known as private schools), and I've even been known to mail a letter from time to time. However, I have never done any of the above in New Jersey. But New Jersey wants my favorite movie sales outlet to charge me for the privilege of shopping via the Internet. Hmm, what's wrong with this picture?
The primary annoyance of this stems from the fact that no benefit accrues to me from this taxation without representation (catchy phrase, isn't it?). Jersey provides no services to me here on the Leftist Coast, so I should not be induced to pay what amounts to highway robbery. Secondly, my favorite outlet has no presence here in Califrisky; so again, there is no reason for taxing any transaction between us. Finally, please note that these Internet sales are sales that would not occur without the Internet. Add in the taxes and additional costs to support their levy and collection, and it's cheaper to buy locally. I lose money out of the deal, which is bad for the economy here, and they lose sales there, which is likewise bad for the economy there. We all lose simply because some halfwit bureaucrat can't keep their hands out of our pockets.
Yes, I'm aware that some local businesses would like to pick up that slack. I personally support our local hardware store, rather than going all the way down to the nearest Home Deport when I need some hardware. At the same time, I appreciate a good price on commodity items, and am not above rewarding stores that cut their prices by giving them my business. If the locals want more business, let them either cut their prices to compete, or build themselves an Internet presence to pull in additional business from elsewhere. Those that refuse to take such steps will find themselves in the same dustbin as our erstwhile friends at Montgomery Ward and K-Mart (which is not yet dead, but might as well be).
It is therefore obvious to even the most casual observer (another catchy phrase!) that Internet sales should remain untaxed. Let thieving politicians look elsewhere for their graft. They need to keep their hands off cyberspace. Let them know how you feel: contact your Congresscritters (for those here in the States), or your local representative, and let them know how you feel. Vox populi, vox Dei.
I note in the papers that the powers-what-be want to tax sales on the Internet. I am bemused. Bearing in mind that a tax is ideally a way for governments to bill their constituents for services rendered, I find it interesting that there are certain local governments who wish to bill even those for whom they render no service whatsoever.
Mind you, that is an idealized tax. The reality is often far grimmer. Taxes in this day and age are usually levied to pay for pork barrel politics, or to replace funds squandered through mismanagement or spent on projects that never should have been funded, publicly or otherwise. A perfect example of this can be seen here in Califrisky, where our wonderful Governor took a 12 billion dollar state budget surplus and drove it into a 50 billion dollar deficit in about two years. Thus, we in the state are required to pay a trebled car-licensing fee in a feeble attempt to make up some of this yawning deficit, among other vexations to the spirit. My wife has gently suggested that only those who voted for Mr. Davis should have to pay the increased fees, or the added gasoline taxes, or the increased sales taxes, or…well, you get the idea. Gasoline fees originally meant to pay for road maintenance are siphoned off to pay for somebody's boondoggle, so we must pay an extra cent per dollar to make sure our highways remain in order. And so it goes.
Well, I drive on those roads, and I enjoy police and fire services, and while I've never ridden in an ambulance, if the average level of driving continues to drop as it has, I almost certainly will at some point in the future. My son attends public schools (very nice ones, thank you very much; not all public schools are inferior to those moron mills known as private schools), and I've even been known to mail a letter from time to time. However, I have never done any of the above in New Jersey. But New Jersey wants my favorite movie sales outlet to charge me for the privilege of shopping via the Internet. Hmm, what's wrong with this picture?
The primary annoyance of this stems from the fact that no benefit accrues to me from this taxation without representation (catchy phrase, isn't it?). Jersey provides no services to me here on the Leftist Coast, so I should not be induced to pay what amounts to highway robbery. Secondly, my favorite outlet has no presence here in Califrisky; so again, there is no reason for taxing any transaction between us. Finally, please note that these Internet sales are sales that would not occur without the Internet. Add in the taxes and additional costs to support their levy and collection, and it's cheaper to buy locally. I lose money out of the deal, which is bad for the economy here, and they lose sales there, which is likewise bad for the economy there. We all lose simply because some halfwit bureaucrat can't keep their hands out of our pockets.
Yes, I'm aware that some local businesses would like to pick up that slack. I personally support our local hardware store, rather than going all the way down to the nearest Home Deport when I need some hardware. At the same time, I appreciate a good price on commodity items, and am not above rewarding stores that cut their prices by giving them my business. If the locals want more business, let them either cut their prices to compete, or build themselves an Internet presence to pull in additional business from elsewhere. Those that refuse to take such steps will find themselves in the same dustbin as our erstwhile friends at Montgomery Ward and K-Mart (which is not yet dead, but might as well be).
It is therefore obvious to even the most casual observer (another catchy phrase!) that Internet sales should remain untaxed. Let thieving politicians look elsewhere for their graft. They need to keep their hands off cyberspace. Let them know how you feel: contact your Congresscritters (for those here in the States), or your local representative, and let them know how you feel. Vox populi, vox Dei.